"Who is going to save our Church? Not our bishops, not our priests and religious. It is up to you, the people. You have the minds, the eyes, the ears to save the Church. Your mission is to see that your priests act like priests, your bishops, like bishops, and your religious act like religious." - Archbishop Fulton J. Sheen, 1972

Thursday, October 31, 2013

On Patti Arroyo's K57 radio talk show, Wednesday, October 30, 2013, Arroyo confirmed that it was she who originally brought up the issue that Fr. Paul Gofigan's dismissal as pastor from Santa Barbara parish was related to his opposition to the institution of the Neocatechumenal Way in his parish.

Arroyo went on to say that she even invited Rohr to comment on that perspective but that Rohr "did not bite".

This is exactly true, so the allegation that Rohr instigated the rumor about that connection is FALSE and so is the allegation that Arroyo was Rohr's accomplice.

So either Arroyo is lying or somebody else is. Arroyo is easily accessible for verification. She's normally on the air Monday through Friday, 10am to 12pm, on K57. The phone number is 477-5757.

And related to that, a person close to Fr. Paul relayed that Fr. Paul had met twice with representatives from the Neocatechumenal Way about starting up a community in his parish. According to the source, Fr. Paul agreed on the condition that any Mass/Eucharist be held in the church. The representatives from the Way refused to accept this condition.

Tuesday, October 29, 2013

"Tim Rohr" was recently "credited" (blamed) by someone we'll call for now "a chancery official" for linking the removal of Fr. Paul Gofigan as pastor of Santa Barbara parish with his resistance to the institution of the Neocatechumenal Way in his parish.

Facts SHOULD matter...especially for "a chancery official."

The FIRST instance of this link was made by radio talk show host, Patty Arroyo, on radio station K57 on July 23. I simply blogged the instance of it and you will find no reference of mine before that.

However, I was soon attacked for doing so, and thus began a series of posts about the Neocatechumenal Way and ever increasing attacks from some of its members. (One wonders what they have to fear and why.)

In addition, the same "chancery official", in the presence of several members of the clergy, slanderously called Patti Arroyo my "accomplice". This will come as a surprise to her. (I'll make sure she knows.)

Such insinuations, slanderous allegations, and groveling in gossip are a serious discredit to the perpetrator, given his status - not to mention a great cause for sadness - and open wide the doors to recourse.

The Legislature goes into session today, Tuesday, October 29. On the session are two abortion-related bills.

Bill 193 would permit the implementation of the informed consent law to move forward without the printed materials having to be submitted to the "rule-making process." The following senators have committed in writing to supporting this amendment:

Tony Ada (R)

Chris Duenas (R)

Michael Limtiaco (R)

Brant McCreadie (R)

Tommy Morrison (R)

Rory Respicio (D)

Dennis Rodriguez, Jr. (D)

One more is needed for passage. We assume that will be Senator Aguon since he introduced a similar measure.

Bill 195 would require "medically appropriate" treatment for children who survive an abortion procedure and would deem them human beings under Guam law.

In addition to praying for the passage of these bills we encourage you to keep an eye on the proceedings as per the TV channels noted on the press release which you can view here.

The bills are listed as nos. 32 and 34 on the agenda. It is not possible at this point to speculate when the legislature will get to them, but keep on eye on this blog for updates.

Monday, October 28, 2013

Today, Monday, October 28, at 2pm, the Rules Committee will vote on whether or not to place Bill 195-32 on the agenda for the legislative session which begins tomorrow.

To review:

Bill 195-32 would declare infants who survive an abortion procedure legal human beings under Guam law, and would mandate medically appropriate treatment for those infants.

25 states have a similar law.

Even though there is a federal born-alive law, that law only applies to bureaus and agencies under federal control, not private abortion clinics.

As 25 other states have found, such an law is necessary to address a gray area in the law as to whether a born-alive infant, previously sentenced to death by abortion, can be considered a legal person and deserving of the legal protections of other human beings.

As mentioned previously, it is difficult to oppose such a bill. The reality that is abortion becomes grotesquely clear when the child lays writing on the delivery table in full view.

Friday, October 25, 2013

Bill 195-32 would outlaw the killing of an infant who survives an abortion and would mandate "medically appropriate" treatment for the child.

In addition to Sirena Mafnas, who gave oral testimony in support of Bill 195-32, as per the committee report, the following individuals submitted written testimonies in support of the bill:

Tim Rohr

Marjorie DeBenedictis, MD

Genevieve Leon-Guerrero-Garrett

Mary Lou Garcia-Pereda

Christy Alcantara

Sharon O'Mallan

Dona Mila Taitano

David Zieber (left off committee report)

This is quite sad. Senator Aguon's committee should have gotten hundreds of emails and letters in support of this bill. No wonder the pro-aborts think they can trample on us. We'll be watching for a call to action from "the Hill."

Local business magnate, Mark Baldyga, was on the radio the other day. It was interesting to hear him comment on the Japanese population implosion from a purely economic perspective.

In case you don't know, Japan, is already the oldest nation on earth. Having embraced two generations of abortion and contraception in the name of material progress, its material progress is now in jeopardy with no "next" generation. This is the real reason for the Japanese economic crash that we in Guam began feeling in the mid-90's.

Japan is also Guam's largest market for its largest economic activity: tourism. And Japan's birth dearth translates into a loss of dollars and cents to our local economy as well as theirs. Thus Baldyga and other dollar and cent guys, seeing the writing on the wall, have been looking to other markets.

Russia is one of those markets. However, that's temporary too. Russia is right behind Japan in the birth dearth and has long since led the world in abortions. It's so desperate now that Putin is paying Russian mothers to have babies and reforming Russia's abortion laws.

Of course there's also China with its billion-plus population. But 30 years of forced abortions and its infamous one-child policy have already began to create an economic quake which some economists say will take China down as an economic giant. Also, expect mass exterminations of old people since there is an exponentially smaller "next" generation compared to the rapidly aging largest group of people in the world.

Relative to the birth dearth of Asian countries, particularly Japan, are several news stories about Japan's "celibacy syndrome". Not only are the Japanese no longer having babies, they are no longer having sex...at least not as much. It's really just natural law. Sex makes babies. And when you quit having babies you'll quit having sex. Japan is proving it.

It's funny, because the pill and abortion on demand began as the great panacea of sexual liberation: freedom to have sex without consequences. It was all about being able to have more sex! It's not nice to fool Mother Nature. Or as Archbishop Fulton Sheen once said: "God forgives. Man forgives. Nature never forgives."

As the bill which attempts to declare infants who survive abortion legal human beings under Guam law (Bill 195) makes its way from Committee to the Session Floor (we hope), it is CRITICAL that supporters of the bill and lawmakers understand the deception that was perpetrated by the five opponents of the bill at the public hearing.

Opposing a bill outlawing the throwing of writhing, struggling infants into the abortion clinic trash is not an easy thing to do. So Guam's champions of abortion had to find another way.

However, this "other way" assumes two things:

1) we are stupid, and

2) we can be bullied.

WE ARE NOT STUPID AND WE WON'T BE BULLIED! Though it remains to be seen what our senators will do.

To combat the absurdities , I wrote an op-ed which appears in today's edition of the Pacific Daily News. Please read it and share it. And email every senator and demand that they not be fooled or bullied by these people.

NOTE: Senator Frank Aguon, the sponsor of the bill, has confirmed as of 10/23/13 that the bill has been reported out of Committee and has promised to do his utmost to get it placed on the agenda. We will link to the committee report as soon as it is available on the Legislature's website.

Wednesday, October 23, 2013

Halloween is around the corner and once again many Catholics will CAVE to the fundamentalist evangelical accusation that Halloween is the "Devil's Holiday".

They will do this by dressing their kids up as biblical figures or Catholic saints instead of ghosts and goblins.

But, if the evangelical fundamentalist accusation that Halloween is the "Devil's Holiday" is true enough to make us shed our scary costumes, then Catholics need to do more than just change costumes. They shouldn't celebrate it at all.

HOWEVER, if any one should dress up as ghosts and goblins and celebrate Halloween, Catholics should, and this post explains why.

Saturday, October 19, 2013

What is not mentioned in this story is that the rise in "toilet babies" parallels the availability of do-it-yourself abortion drugs, now mandated by Obama to be free and accessible to girls of any age.

Friday, October 18, 2013

There's more here in a business magazine about the consequences of contraception than you're likely to ever find in a contemporary Catholic publication, or for that matter, hear from the pulpit in a year of Sundays (in most churches).

Time To Admit It: The Church Has Always Been Right On Birth Control

Painting the Catholic Church as "out of touch" is like shooting fish in a barrel, what with the funny hats and gilded churches. And nothing makes it easier than the Church's stance against contraception.

Many people, (including our editor) are wondering why the Catholic Church doesn't just ditch this requirement. They note that most Catholics ignore it, and that most everyone else finds it divisive, or "out-dated." C'mon! It's the 21st century, they say! Don't they SEE that it's STUPID, they scream.

Here's the thing, though: the Catholic Church is the world's biggest and oldest organization. It has buried all of the greatest empires known to man, from the Romans to the Soviets. It has establishments literally all over the world, touching every area of human endeavor. It's given us some of the world's greatest thinkers, from Saint Augustine on down to René Girard. When it does things, it usually has a good reason. Everyone has a right to disagree, but it's not that they're a bunch of crazy old white dudes who are stuck in the Middle Ages.

Thursday, October 17, 2013

"...and that's where I would urge you to put your attention, your focus, and the budget purse strings...towards that, and NOT what's before you today." - C. Leon GuerreroFormer Senator Carlotta Leon Guerrero had a curious take on Bill 195-32. She used the occasion of the public hearing to draw attention to Guam’s infant mortality rate by opposing a bill which would outlaw the killing of infants who survive abortions.

Watch it here, then read the comments below.

Ms. Leon Guerrero attributes Guam’s infant mortality rate, which she says is “twice that of the United States”, on “shaken baby syndrome”, on “kids in poor houses with violence”, on “elderly grandmothers with Alzheimers”, and on “young mothers leaving their kids and going out.”

Obviously, from her pile of statistics, which she waves around in front of the senators, she didn’t bother to get the actual statistics for the reason so many infants die on Guam.

So here, we'll provide it.

At the public hearing for Bill No. 62-32, now P.L. 32-030, Dr. Aurelio Espinola testified that of the 44 deaths of children in 2011 under one year of age, he had examined 34 of the bodies and determined that the primary cause of death was “due to prematurity”.

This means that they probably died before they ever left the hospital (and not at the hands of "grandmothers with Alzheimers"), since doctors normally do not send premature infants in danger of dying home with the parents. Now why would that be? Why would so many infants be dying at the hospital?

Bill 195-32, the INFANT CHILD'S RIGHT TO LIFE ACT would mandate normal medical care for a child who survives an abortion procedure. The bill does NOT require the doctor to save the child, but only to acknowledge that once expelled from the mother, the child is a legal human being under the laws of Guam, and is not to be treated as medical waste. Four of the Five women below opposed the bill. Only one supported it.

Sirena Mafnas ends her message with a threat these women have no answer for: "I am the future!" For she and others like her will outlive the pro-abortion generation that continues to preserve Guam as the easiest place in the nation to procure an abortion despite the dominance of the Catholic Church on the island. The abortion-preserving generation of Guam will die and Sirena's generation will replace it. Maybe then - as Sirena hopes - Chamorros will stop their self-genocide. Share this message far and wide.

"Since the end of World War II, the Guam native population, who are mostly Roman Catholics, has undergone one of the most dramatic socioeconomic developments ever recorded. They have rapidly become incorporated into the dominant American culture and economy. This accelerated process of modernization has been accompanied by a very sharp fertility decline. One reason for this decline has been the increasing defection of Guam Roman Catholic women from the traditional teaching of their Church on the subject of birth control. This trend of fertility decline, although at higher levels, resembles that of East Asian countries with rapid fertility decline."

Wednesday, October 16, 2013

Not sure. Maybe it's just the stormy weather that has me in a philosophical mood. But I hereby have decided to unfriend Zoltan and block him from these pages. Here's why.

Zoltan is a member of the Neocatechumenal Way. Almost everyone I know in the Way is a good person, sincere, truly seeking a deeper relationship with Christ, and overall, very good people. In fact, I deem the Way to be a very good thing with many fruits. The Way does what the parishes have long failed to do: find the little and the lost and bring them in.

This is good. Shame on us who have overlooked the hurting, and praises for the NCW for having done what the rest of us have failed to do. I gave a long account of my praises for the NCW in 2008 which you can find on my blog at TheMassNeverEnds.com It remains one of the most oft-viewed posts.

Sorry. I'm having trouble keeping up with who is attacking me, especially since some of them want to stay anonymous. As you may have seen in the comments of previous posts, "Zoltan" had descended from reasonable challenges to calling this blog "disgusting", etc. So when I got the following comment on a post titled "Zoltan Says" as part of a longer stream of comments, I, of course, thought it was from him. But it wasn't. It was from "Anonymous". Just in case you're up to following all this, here's the first comment:

oh did you take that as an insult? none intended on my end. Please enlighten me about what transpired in 2008. Change is hard to accept as with Vatican II as you and most of your followers know. I guess the NCW is always going to have a splinter in their eye from those who do not accept the log in theirs, the NCW claims to be a fruit of Vatican II and most of those who have problems with the NCW are the traditionalists who feel that Vatican II was a mistake. Extreme Traditionalists spend so much time trying to be in the right, trying to not make a mistake that they loose out on so much that can be done to help our fellow Christians. How often Tim do you see a person who has not been to church in years walk in to your apologetics class? Not that often I bet. I will even go on to say that its just the same group that flocks the TLM. right? How often have your group of followers, your prodigies chosen to not take part in the events of our local church? and this is the same thing the NCW on ZOLTAN SAYS

To which I responded:

MAN. TALK ABOUT A HATER! IS THIS WHAT THE NEOCATECHUMENAL WAY TEACHES? Oh, and BTW, there's about 3 people who attend our group regularly that go to the TLM. Come and ask them.

Tuesday, October 15, 2013

In my testimony in support of Bill 195-32 of October 13, 2013, I wrote that I could give the name of a happy adoptive father of a child who survived an abortion on Guam. Former Guam resident, Mike Carey, is the name of the “happy adoptive father” and he has given me permission to share the following.

Chairman, Committee on the Guam US Military Relocation, Homeland Security, Veteran’s Affairs and Judiciary

RE: TESTIMONY IN SUPPORT OF BILL 195-32

Dear Senator Aguon:

I write in support of Bill 195-32 and urge its prompt passage.

I also want to address the erroneous claims by Lou Leon Guerrero and Anita Arriola made at the recent public hearing.

Lou Leon Guerrero was reported as saying: “I am aware that there is always (sic) federal legislation that addresses the issue at hand, thus making this legislation unnecessary.” And Anita Arriola reportedly claimed that the measure is "unnecessary since Guam and federal law already protect born alive infants, whether or not they are born alive as a result of an abortion.” 1

In determining the meaning of any Act of Congress, or of any ruling, regulation, or interpretation of the various administrative bureaus and agencies of the United States, the words “person”, “human being”, “child”, and “individual”, shall include every infant member of the species homo sapiens who is born alive at any stage of development.

As is clearly evident, the law only applies to acts, rulings, regulations and interpretations to bureaus and agencies under federal control. Also, the law goes on to only define the term “born-alive” and does not mandate medical care nor impose a penalty for not doing so as does Bill 195-32. (See attached copy of the complete statute.)

“There being an imminent danger for the Faith, prelates must be questioned, even publicly, by their subjects. Thus, St. Paul, who was a subject of St. Peter, questioned him publicly on account of an imminent danger of scandal in a matter of Faith. And, as the Glossa of St. Augustine puts it (Ad Galatas 2.14), 'St. Peter himself gave the example to those who govern so that if sometimes they stray from the right way, they will not reject a correction as unworthy even if it comes from their subjects.” (Summa Theologiae, IIa IIae, Q. 33, A. 4)

Home education means the teaching by the parents at home, by both parents. A father’s contribution to the home education of his children is indispensable.

Though the education of children does not exclude all other forms of education, nevertheless, the home is primary, so that education by both parents is secondary to nothing…. Every other means of training or educating the child is dependent on the home.

Both the body and the soul need to be educated … therefore, home education constantly educates the one while being fully conscious that the other is also being educated.

I am not saying that home education is necessary merely in the modern world … as though the necessity did not exist in the 18th or 19th centuries. It is not just because the modern world has become so widely and deeply secularized that home education has become a necessity. No. In fact, one of the main factors contributing to the secularization of once strongly Christian cultures has been the neglect of sound, orthodox, authentic, courageous, magisterial, historic Catholic teaching in faith and morals by parents.

Thursday, October 10, 2013

We urge you to send a letter of your support for Bill 195-32 to Senator Frank Aguon, Jr, who chairs the oversight committee for this bill. Bill 195-32 is entitled the INFANT CHILD RIGHT TO LIVE ACT and would mandate normal medical care for a child who survives a failed abortion.

If this sounds familiar, it's because it is. The original version of the bill was introduced in 2010 as Bill 309-30, and though it received much public support, the bill never made it out of committee. It is hoped that the current bill will not suffer the same fate as its predecessor.

Tuesday, October 8, 2013

NOTE: WE DO NOT RECOMMEND SUPPORTING BILL 191-32 as introduced by Senator Frank Aguon, Jr. Even though Senator Aguon's bill attempts to do the same thing as Bill 193-32, it erroneously eliminates the whole of Section 4. This could easily create a legitimate opportunity for opposition to the bill ONCE AGAIN sinking our very long attempt at implementing informed consent legislation.

Right on cue, the opposition showed up.

In her testimony to oppose both bills, Attorney Anita Arriola states:

"Bills 191-32 and 193-32, which would delete section 4, undermine the purpose and intent of the law."

Of course, only 191-32 deletes the whole of section 4 and 193-32 leaves intact the important provision requiring the printed materials and checklist certification to be reviewed and approved by the Department of Health and Human Services.

To read my full response to Ms. Arriola and my letter of support for Bill 193-32, go here.

Monday, October 7, 2013

Many have wondered just where Pope Francis is going. One day he is condemning abortion, the next day he tells us not to obsess over it. This New York Times op-ed provides one of the clearer views. Here's a few excerpts:

John Allen Jr., one of the keenest observers of the Vatican, has called Francis a “pope for the Catholic middle,” positioned somewhere between the church’s rigorists and the progressives who pine to Episcopalianize the faith.

And they worry as well that we have seen something like his strategy attempted before, when the church’s 1970s-era emphasis on social justice, liturgical improvisation and casual-cool style had disappointing results: not a rich engagement with modern culture but a surrender to that culture’s “Me Decade” manifestations — producing tacky liturgy, ugly churches, Jonathan Livingston Seagull theology and ultimately empty pews.

Sunday, October 6, 2013

“We welcome what Pope Francis said today when he called for the Catholic church to be ‘home for all’ and not a ‘small chapel’ focused on doctrine and limited views on moral teachings. This message resonates with so many Catholics because it reflects our personal experiences—Catholics are gay and lesbian; Catholics use birth control and Catholics have abortions." - Jon O’Brien, president of Catholics for Choice.

I've taken more than a bit of criticism for my questioning of some of the things Pope Francis has said recently. As you can read, by clicking on the tab above, none of what I've said has been hostile or unfounded. But, nevertheless, some think that any questioning of a pope is disrespectful if not disobedient.

I'm not complaining. In fact, I find the criticism amusing: BECAUSE I am doing exactly what I was taught to do by my Jesuit educators and pastors. Talk about Karma!

At Loyola Marymount in Los Angeles, the new conservatism of John Paul II (this was 1978), was openly impugned and mockingly derided.

In 2003, while visiting the campus, and with John Paul II visibly ailing, I met up with some former teachers still at the campus who proudly admitted they had long been praying for John Paul II's death so the church could get on with the revolution and get around to ordaining women.

During Benedict's pontificate, my LMU Alumni magazine featured so many stories subtly hostile to the Magisterium that I begged them to stop sending me the stupid thing.

And at a meeting with a Jesuit priest friend a few years ago during which I questioned him as to why he and others played fast and loose with everything from moral teaching to liturgical practice, I was told very plainly that: "disobedience in the church is the path to progress."

So now that a Jesuit is Pope, I am simply applying 30 years of Jesuit "training" to the Jesuit in Rome who speaks very much like my Jesuit professors and friends. (I still consider them friends.)

It's rather cathartic, actually. In fact, the Pope himself has instructed us to "make a mess". Let us join him. Here's his latest:

Saturday, October 5, 2013

By coincidence, while Catholics of every stripe scramble to clarify the pope's assault on the word "proselytism" (i.e. "Proselytism is solemn nonsense"), I met with a Mormon friend who openly invited me to become a Mormon. At our first meeting I asked him to tell me about the Mormon church. His immediate answer was "We are a proselytizing church." He said it with surety and pride. I admired that. I also admired his willingness to simply invite me to consider his church. Perhaps that is why, while Catholic parishes crumble and close (google "Catholic parish closing") the Mormon church is set to "become the world's largest."

(Just a note. Upon his invitation, I extended one of my own. We meet again next week. Another note: certain Catholic parishes and dioceses and religious orders as well are actually growing. We'll talk about that another time.)

Friday, October 4, 2013

Christians are being singled out and massacred from Pakistan to Syria to the Nairobi shopping mall. Kirsten Powers on the deafening silence from U.S. pews and pulpits.

Christians in the Middle East and Africa are being slaughtered, tortured, raped, kidnapped, beheaded, and forced to flee the birthplace of Christianity. One would think this horror might be consuming the pulpits and pews of American churches. Not so. The silence has been nearly deafening.

Thursday, October 3, 2013

And thank you for helping drive another 124 page views to my blog SO FAR today. Without people like you to attack me, I would look like the bad guy in this debate. Instead, you simply provide the forum for me to respond. More to come! Tell your friends. Comment box is open!

"This is pretty much disgusting how you lump together all the comments here in one single page without any name or date attached. This is your way to "take care of" those who take time and effort to respond to your blog entries."

Dear Zoltan, thank you for using your real name when you posted this comment. All of the other comments are posted as "Anonymous" or a fictitious name is used . "Anonymous" is an option that Blogger gives you when you comment. Also, I posted the comments, all of them, both for and against me, on one page to make them easier to find for the average reader so they don't have to page through each post to find them.

Also, Zoltan, as you will note, at the end of each comment on the Comment Page is the link to the post where the comment can be found with the name of the poster and the date of the post. Did you try clicking on the links or were you in too much of hurry to call me "disgusting"?

Just wondering. You are a great witness to the Neocatechumenal Way. Keep it up. We all look forward to more of your witnessing. In fact, I think so much of your comments, I'm giving you your own Label, so posts relative to your witnessing may be more easily found. More to come! Bye.

ZOLTAN HAS MORE TO SAY. (See his comment)

Tim, this is truly flattering that you set up a new label. However, regarding the questionable handling of comments at your Facebook page, I am not really inclined to make further comments. So your new label may die out very soon. ;(
I kinda find it sad that you promote a culture of anonymity at your blog that makes your commenter look cowards. Then you back stab by making murky references to their identities. Why? That was your trap?
Well, definitely not a very highly aiming culture of debate.

Dear Zoltan, Blogger is a turnkey Google App. The App gives the option of anonymity. And "references to their identities"? If they posted as Anonymous, what reference do I have? And as for the "highly aiming culture of debate", so far as I can see, you are the only one that has descended to using expletives (i.e. "disgusting"). But thank you for your contributions. I have saved them all.

October 1 marked the opening of the state health care exchanges...and new abortion funding through them. In March of 2011, I tried to get Congresswoman to oppose Obamacare and provided documents from the USCCB Legal Counsel on how Obamacare funded abortions.

“ACA (Obamacare) allows use of federal funds to pay for elective abortions and for plans that cover such abortions, contradicting longstanding federal policy.” - USCCB, June 28, 2012

"...contrary to the policy of the Hyde amendment and regardless of what it may provide in any year, federal subsidies (in the form of such premium tax credits) may be used to help pay for overall health plans whose issuers have decided to include elective abortions." - USCCB, May 24, 2010

Both bills seek to eliminate the need to subject the printed materials required by the informed consent for abortion law (P.L. 31-235) to the rule making process "pursuant to the Administrative Adjudication Law."

Otherwise, you are simply requested to submit the following statement either by email, letter, or orally at the public hearing:

"I support Bill 193-32 and urge you to pass it promptly."

As per Senator Rodriguez' public hearing notification:

Testimony should be addressed to Senator Dennis Rodriguez, Jr., Chairman, and may be submitted via- hand delivery to our office at 176 Serenu Avenue Suite 107 Tamuning, Guam 96931 or our mailbox at the Main Legislature Building at 155 Hesler Place, Hagåtña, Guam 96910, or via email to senatordrodriguez@gmail.com.

NOTE: WE DO NOT RECOMMEND SUPPORTING BILL 191-32 as introduced by Senator Frank Aguon, Jr. Even though Senator Aguon's bill attempts to do the same thing as Bill 193-32, it erroneously eliminates the whole of Section 4. This could easily create a legitimate opportunity for opposition to the bill ONCE AGAIN sinking our very long attempt at implementing informed consent legislation.

If you are interested in understanding why we do not support Bill 191-32, read on. If not, please just support Bill 193-32 as directed above.

WHY WE DO NOT RECOMMEND SUPPORTING BILL 191-32

Section 2 of Senator Aguon's Bill 191-31 states:

Section 4. of Public Law 31-235, is hereby deleted in its entirety.

Here is the whole of Section 4 which would be eliminated by Senator Aguon's bill:

Section 4. Effective Date. This Act shall take effect sixty (60 days after the "printed materials" described in proposed § 3218.1(c) and the "checklist certification" described in proposed § 3218.1(c)(5) have been approved by the Department and, pursuant to the rule making process set forth in Title 5, Chapter 9, Article 3 of the Guam Code Annotated.

Senator Rodriguez' Bill 193-32 does not call for the elimination of the section in its entirety but amends it as follows:

Section 4. Effective Date. This Act shall take effect sixty (60 days after the "printed materials" described in proposed § 3218.1(c) and the "checklist certification" described in proposed § 3218.1(c)(5) have been approved by the Director of the Department of Public Health and Social Services. Department and, pursuant to the rule making process set forth in Title 5, Chapter 9, Article 3 of the Guam Code Annotated.

If for some reason your email client does not display this properly the key changes are:

"Department" was replaced with "Director the Department of Public Health and Social Services."

And the following was struck out: "and, pursuant to the rule making process set forth in Title 5, Chapter 9, Article 3 of the Guam Code Annotated."

As you can see, Bill 193-32 leaves in place the very important provision that the materials be approved by the department tasked with overseeing the implementation of all health-related laws. Without this, the public would have no assurance that the materials used in the informed consent process conform to the provisions of the informed consent law, and opponents would surely and correctly use this point to once again derail the legislation.

We do not suppose that Senator Aguon did this purposely and assume he probably acted with the best of intentions. But prior to introducing his bill, he did not consult with Senator Rodriguez who had oversight of the legislation, nor with Esperansa who had shepherded the legislation, assembled the required printed materials, and saw to the construction of the critical language deleting the "choke point" provision.

We are giving Senator Aguon the benefit of the doubt, thus we are not asking you to express your disapproval of his bill, but only to express support for Senator Rodriguez' Bill 193-32

At this point it is not necessary to express your support to every senator, but direct it to Senator Rodriguez as instructed above. More later.

Tuesday, October 1, 2013

A very different perspective. While all of us in the fat, comfortable West plump our pillows and sooth ourselves with the new papal messages of peace and love, our Christian brothers and sisters in the East are being slaughtered at a rate we haven't seen since the Caesars.

Sylvana De Mari Writes to the Pope

"You are loved by all, Your Holiness. Are you sure that's an advantage? I think the time has come to be hated. Put on all your trappings, which are not trash but symbols of 2,000 years of history, give the weight of those 2000 years, and go to Cairo, and fight for Coptic Christians, and weep over their burned churches and then go to Syria and then later to Pakistan. Then, if you have time, you can also go to a soccer game but I don’t think that time will allow it. We are at the darkest moment of Christianity since the beginning of time. We need a Pope."

On September 13, Fr. Paul Gofigan wrote a letter to Archbishop Apuron requesting that he be restored to his office as pastor of Santa Barbara Parish:

"I therefore ask that since I have not been removed and that you just started the process of removing me, that you restore me to my office as pastor..."

According to sources near Fr. Paul, there has been no response from the Archbishop to Fr. Paul's request.

(Note: I do not have access to Fr. Paul or the Chancery and must rely on third party sources. If this is incorrect, Fr. Paul or the chancery is welcome to post a comment giving the correct information.)

Can. 1741§3 authorizes a bishop to provide a parochial administrator for a parish "while recourse against a decree of removal is pending," but as of yet, there is no decree of removal. In fact, according to Fr. Paul, upon retaining a canon lawyer to represent him, he was told by a representative of the chancery that he could not retain an attorney to challenge his removal since there had not yet been a decree of removal!

Of course, the fact that there was no decree is backed up by the fact that the Archbishop officially initiated the removal process on September 10 (see Gofigan to be Ousted), while Fr. Paul was ipso facto removed as pastor via the Aviso of July 17 (See Chancery v Gofigan).

According to a local attorney familiar with the proceedings, though not a canon lawyer, the Archbishop's replacement of Fr. Paul with a parochial administrator before a decree of removal is canonically illegal and could be damaging to the overall case against Fr. Paul.

The only justifiable explanation for the Archbishop's continued refusal to restore Fr. Paul to his office at this point is that the Archbishop believes that Fr. Paul somehow poses a clear and present danger! But TO WHO? is the question.

The whole thing is unfolding into quite the drama. Can't wait for the movie!